Ukraine “cannot decide its destiny” because it depends on US political climate
By Ahmed Adel | August 11, 2023
The Ukrainian Army’s high dependence on Western military support to continue its fight against Russian troops has placed Kiev in a position where it cannot decide its path for itself, said an analyst on CNN. The outlet also indicated that after more than 17 months of active combat, the Ukrainian conflict had entered a decisive stage since Kiev now depends on the decisions taken in Washington more than ever, which will be worrying for Ukraine since there is every chance that the next US president ends up being a Republican.
The current situation in Eastern Europe will depend on “outside factors,” such as “shifting political forces in the US, Moscow and European capitals,” Stephen Collinson points out in his analysis on CNN. “One of Ukraine’s greatest tragedies as it pursues a critical offensive that has, so far, failed to meet its own and Western expectations is that it cannot, by itself, decide its destiny.”
According to him, the results of the Ukrainian counteroffensive — which began in June and has shown no progress — “would have particular ramifications in the United States since it could heighten questions over US support for the war that will be pushed into an acrimonious election year.”
In fact, former Republican lawmaker Adam Kinzinger recently acknowledged widespread pessimism within his party about the billions of dollars delivered to Kiev since February 2022.
The CNN analyst also pointed out that the Americans are preparing for a possible election contest between President Joe Biden —a Democrat and radical supporter of Kiev — and former president Donald Trump, a supposed NATO sceptic who has promised to end tensions between Russia and Ukraine in just one day.
Collinson believes that even if Trump does not win the presidential nomination, it is not certain that voters will support Biden because there is increasing disbelief about the growing involvement of Washington in the conflict. In his text, Collinson recalls recently published information on CNN that US officials are receiving adverse reports about the scant progress of Ukrainian troops against Russian forces.
“Ukraine’s struggles – and heavy combat losses – stem in part from entrenched, layered defensive positions, trenches and minefields that Russia had months to construct and the battlefield reality that an attacking force needs a numerical advantage over well dug-in troops,” wrote the expert.
For Collinson, the conflict could end after the US fully enters the electoral process to define a new president.
“There is so far no clear path even to a ceasefire,” he observed. “Ultimately, the capacity of both Russia and Ukraine to sustain heavy battlefield losses will be critical in deciding the point at which either side might be open to a settlement – when the cost of continuing to fight might be outweighed by the rewards of ending it.”
According to the journalist, the stagnation of the conflict could gain more weight in the political debate within the US.
“While foreign policy is rarely a deciding factor in presidential elections and the war in Ukraine is not a dominant issue in the GOP primary, some party supporters in early voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire do raise it and question US generosity after months of high inflation, which, even if it’s cooling, has contributed to persistently dour views of the American economy,” said the expert.
“So when US voters decide their own futures in November 2024, there’s a good chance they will be playing a large role in sealing Ukraine’s fate as well,” Collinson concluded.
The possibility that the Democratic Party could be back out of power next year is hurrying Biden to maximise his opportunities to funnel US taxpayer money into the financial blackhole that Ukraine has become. Biden’s endless attempts to seek the US Congress’ approval to transfer billions of dollars in additional support to Ukraine in a bid to prolong the war against Russia is a demonstration of this, especially when considering that Washington has already transferred to Ukraine at least $76.8 billion in assistance since February 2022.
According to an older estimate by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Ukraine, by May 2023, had received more than $100 billion in humanitarian aid and military support from more than 40 countries. Of that amount, Washington has contributed around $51 billion dollars, more than half, in military, security, financial and humanitarian assistance.
At the end of July, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Kiev does not have sufficient resources. However, the US, NATO members, and other institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, delivered all the money to Ukraine. Rather, if Zelensky is struggling now, he will have an even bigger problem in the coming months because the money from the West will dry up as the level of support cannot be maintained, especially in the context of the failed counter-offensive.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Biden Asks Congress for $13 Billion in New Ukraine Military Aid as Opposition Grows
Sputnik – 10.08.2023
WASHINGTON – US President Joe Biden in a letter to Congress has asked for an additional $13 billion in supplemental funding to continue military assistance to Ukraine next year.
“$9.5 billion for equipment for Ukraine and replenishment of [US Department of Defense] stocks; and $3.6 billion for continued military, intelligence, and other defense support,” the document said.
Biden is also asking for $7.3 billion for economic, humanitarian, and security assistance to Ukraine.
The proposal for additional Ukraine aid totals some $24 billion, including some $2.3 billion intended as leverage to gain more aid from other donors via the World Bank.
However, combined with an additional $2.65 billion in funding for border security, $12 billion in disaster relief efforts, and $416 million in combatting the fentanyl crisis, among other domestic matters, the congressional request totals upwards of $40 billion in supplemental aid.
The Thursday filing marks the first such request by the Biden White House since Republicans claimed control of the House of Representatives at the start of the year. While previous requests had been largely met with Congress’ backing, GOP members have grown increasingly hesitant toward continued aid.
In fact, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy vowed in early June that any requests for supplemental Ukraine aid would not be taken up in the lower chamber – regardless of bipartisan efforts taken up in the Senate.
At the time, McCarthy explained that any additional funds would need to be cleared as part of an annual appropriations process, underscoring finances would have to be shifted elsewhere from the Pentagon’s funds.
“I think what we really need to do, we need to get the efficiencies in the Pentagon,” the House speaker told US media in June when referring to the Pentagon’s budget. “Think about it, $886 billion. You don’t think there’s waste? … I consider myself a hawk, but I don’t want to waste money. So I think we’ve got to find efficiencies.”
Shortly after the Thursday request was issued, US Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) told Sputnik that US President Joe Biden must focus on supporting efforts to improve security within the United States, rather than on spending more funding on a proxy war in Ukraine.
“Rather than spending a single penny more fighting a proxy war in Ukraine and killing more people, a more worthwhile effort would be if Biden would put America first by allocating resources in our country to secure the southern border,” Gosar said, touching on the US’ continued fight to combat illegal immigration.
He added that resources could also be better spent on “funding law enforcement efforts to combat the violent crime and drugs destroying cities across America, or aiding our homeless population, including countless veterans, who are sleeping on sidewalks.”
The hefty request also comes as the US public has grown increasingly cold toward such military aid.
A recent poll determined that 55% of surveyed Americans opposed Congress approving Ukraine aid, with only 45% disagreeing. Earlier Wednesday, the White House attempted to shoot down the sentiment, telling reporters that continued efforts were paramount to the “national security of the American people.”
US National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby touched on the polling on Thursday and opted to reiterate the White House’s stance that the American people understand why Biden requested billions more in aid for Ukraine.
“The polls notwithstanding, I think the American people understand what is at stake here,” Kirby said.
To date, the US has provided Ukraine with more than $100 billion in aid since the start of the conflict, with the majority of the funds being designated specifically for military equipment.
White House Steamrolls Over Poll Showing Americans Don’t Want to Fund Ukraine
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 10.08.2023
The US has sent over $113 billion in military and economic support to Ukraine over the past 18 months, with NATO allies sending tens of billions more. The assistance, which includes nearly $100 billion in military aid, did not endow Kiev with the firepower necessary to mount a successful counteroffensive against Russia.
The White House has dismissed polling showing that a majority of Americans don’t want to send any more money to Ukraine to fund NATO’s proxy war against Russia, ruling out that assistance would stop in spite of public wishes.
“We have seen throughout this war solid support from the American people, solid support from the Congress in a bipartisan and bicameral way for continuing to support Ukraine and we’re going to stay focused on that,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said.
“It’s not just important to people of Ukraine, but it’s important to our European allies and partners, particularly our NATO allies, given that this fighting is on the doorstep of many of those NATO allies,” and to the “national security of the American people,” Kirby added.
The White House spokesman inserted the traditional ‘Vladimir Putin the bogeyman’ scare tactic, telling the Americans who don’t want to continue funding the proxy war that “if we just sit back and we let Putin win, we let him take Ukraine, where does it stop next?”
The White House is seeking Congressional approval to sneak tens of billions of dollars more in additional “supplemental funding” into next year’s defense budget, with the Pentagon coming up with new creative ways to scrounge additional cash from already approved outlays by using accounting tricks.
While most US media and most of the US political class in Washington continue to support funding Ukraine (apart from a handful of MAGA-leaning Republicans), a bombshell poll published last week revealed that 55 percent of Americans don’t want Congress to authorize any more funds for Ukraine. 51 percent said the US has already done enough to help. Nearly 8 in ten expressed concerns about the conflict dragging on, with 59 percent fearing that the Ukrainian crisis could unleash a wider war in Europe. 56 percent of respondents said they continue to see the Ukrainian conflict as a national security threat – down from 72 percent in February of 2022.
Ordinary Americans’ shifting attitudes toward the Ukrainian crisis have been picked up on by presidential candidates from both major parties, as well as independents, with major candidates calling for an end to the conflict, and pointing to the West’s role in starting it.
Former President Donald Trump, the leading candidate among Republicans by a long shot, has promised to end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours of winning the 2024 election. Democratic Party hopeful Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promises to talk to Russia and has emphasized that the West has “no business putting NATO in Ukraine.” Leading independent candidate Cornel West has also called for a negotiated settlement to the crisis.
Last Stop Before Willoughby
By William Schryver – imetatronink – August 9, 2023
“What the West has, and has had for some time now, is a single-shot military. One serious campaign, whether finally won or lost, would disarm the West for a decade.” — “Aurelien“
This, folks, is the simple truth of the matter.
The US simply could not, at this moment — nor at any time in even the medium-term future — mount and sustain a campaign the size, intensity, and duration of what we have seen in Ukraine for the past 18 months.
US logistical chains would have long-since broken down; losses in men and equipment — including LOTS of cargo ships and their warship escorts — would have been calamitous.
Oh, sure, there’s the huge chorus of people who are gung-ho convinced that US air and naval power would overcome all obstacles in a matter of days, bringing the presumptuous Russians to their knees.
That’s not what would happen, you dopes.
What would happen is that, despite a few spectacular successes to stuff the first 24-hour news cycle, the “full-spectrum dominance” everyone believes the US wields would suffer severe immediate losses across the entire military spectrum.
Dozens of US aircraft of all types would be shot down in the first 100 hours of war. Several US ships would be damaged or sunk. US bases in both Europe and around the globe would be struck. US airborne ISR assets would be aggressively targeted; military and communications satellite arrays would be disabled.
Within literally just a few days, the US would start to experience severe stand-off strike munitions shortages, greatly exacerbated by the high interception rate Russian air defenses would achieve.
The Russians have already demonstrated, over the past 18 months, that they can shoot down ANY manner of strike missile the US can field against them — not all of them all the time, but most of them most of the time.
No other military on the planet has previously attested this level of capability. The US does not have it, and is almost certainly at least a decade away from developing it.
And, make no mistake, if the US were to strike at targets on Russian soil, the Russians would strike back at targets on US soil. I do not believe they would launch a nuclear “first-strike” against the US, but I can guarantee they would use their submarine fleet and conventional long-range airstrike capability to hit strategic targets on US soil.
It would be a shocking exhibition of 21st century great power warfare.
Both sides would be hurt badly, but the Russians would not be even severely depleted, let alone defeated, whereas the US would be hurt in a fashion it has never experienced in its history, only to then look around and discover itself in a state of acute logistical crisis after only a fortnight of high-intensity combat operations.
That will be the moment of decision; the last stop before Willoughby, as it were.
And, if the scenario I have sketched were to actually develop, there will come a moment, fairly early on, when saner heads within the halls of empire — those who have, hitherto, acquiesced as this catastrophe unfolded — well, they will have to choose to finally act to stop the madness, or stand idly by as they and all the rest of us are acted upon by events that spiral out of control.
US Senate Candidate Says NATO ‘Dinosaur of an Institution,’ Should Be Dissolved
Sputnik – 09.08.2023
WASHINGTON – NATO is a relic and should have been abolished after German reunification, independent candidate for the US Senate from New York Diane Sare told Sputnik.
“I think NATO should be dissolved. I think it should have been dissolved when Germany was reunified,” Sare said. “I think frankly, it’s dead already. I mean, you know, there’s so much dissent within NATO already as it is. It is a dinosaur of an institution. So I don’t think it’s really going to be around that much longer.”
The future of the alliance depends on how long some of its members in Europe “who are bearing the brunt of the insanity of the current American and British leadership want to stick around and play that game having their economies destroyed,” she continued.
The candidate declined to speculate on how the alliance would fall apart, but expressed belief that “it’s simply not going to be able to continue” because “it’s really a dead institution.”
NATO has not stopped expanding since the dissolution of the rival Warsaw Pact and collapse of the Soviet Union, drawing the ire of Moscow. The relationship took a nosedive over a 2014 change of power in Ukraine and Crimea’s accession to Russia.
In December 2021, Russia requested guarantees that the alliance would not expand eastward to include Ukraine and Georgia, but was refused. In February 2022, Russia launched a military operation in Ukraine.
NATO responded by deploying even more troops to the eastern flank. At the Vilnius summit in July this year, the alliance reaffirmed that Ukraine will become a NATO member and removed the requirement for a Membership Action Plan to accelerate its accession after the conflict with Russia ends.
Israel threatens to strike ‘every meter’ of Lebanon
The Cradle | August 8, 2023
Israel’s Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, said on 8 August in a message addressed to both Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, that Tel Aviv is prepared to strike “every meter” of the country.
“Do not make a mistake, we do not want war, but we are ready to defend our citizens, our soldiers, and our sovereignty,” the minister said.
“We will not hesitate to employ all of our power and to attack every meter of Hezbollah and of Lebanon … and return Lebanon to the stone age,” he added.
Gallant said that Hezbollah “might mistakenly think that they can test Israel” due to the deep internal crisis it is facing, and the vow made by many of its army reservists to boycott military service protests against the government’s judicial reform program.
He affirmed, however, that Israel would not be divided in the event that Hezbollah threatened it with war.
Gallant’s threats came just hours after the Lebanese army mobilized its naval forces in response to Israeli boats that violated Lebanese sovereignty on 8 August.
Al-Mayadeen news outlet observed the Israeli boats entering Lebanon’s territorial waters via a camera located in the Naqoura area while the Lebanese army was escorting a tour of dozens of journalists to the southern borders.
Recently, there has been a series of Lebanese responses to ongoing Israeli violations of the country’s sovereignty. These violations include excavations on Lebanon’s side of the border, which serve as the basis for an Israeli plan to build a defensive wall.
Most recently, in early July, Israel annexed the northernmost part of the already occupied southern border village of Ghajar – which is internationally recognized Lebanese territory. The move drew widespread condemnation and has exacerbated the existing tensions on the border.
As a result of constant Israeli incursions, the Lebanese and Israeli militaries came close to facing off on the border last month. The tensions also relate to an outpost erected by Hezbollah earlier this year in the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms area – which has been under occupation since 1967.
Despite Israeli threats, complaints to the UN, and pressure from Washington, the Hezbollah outpost remains in place.
Last week, Israeli National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi said that there is a “weakening in the policy of self-restraint” by Hezbollah on the border.
US Stirs Up Waters of Persian Gulf, Escalates Tensions With Iran
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 08.08.2023
The US could put armed troops on commercial ships sailing through the Strait of Hormuz. The move could upset the region’s security and create unnecessary risks for the US, DC scholars warn.
The US is beefing up its presence in the Middle East, despite earlier claims that it would scale down its involvement in the region.
According to the US press, thousands of US Marines and sailors have been brought to the Persian Gulf by the USS Bataan and the USS Carter Hall. The buildup has been ongoing for several months. In March, A-10 Thunderbolt II warplanes arrived at the Al Dhafra Air Base. US F-16 and F-35 fighter jets have also been dispatched to the region as well as the USS Thomas Hudner destroyer. In May, the US, British, and French navies conducted patrols in the Strait of Hormuz, which links the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea and open ocean.
On August 4, unnamed US officials told the press that the Pentagon was considering putting armed personnel on commercial ships traveling through the Strait of Hormuz.
Why are the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf again in the focus of the US military? Washington is pointing the finger at the “resurgent” Iran, claiming that the measures are necessary to prevent the Islamic Republic from “seizing and harassing” civilian vessels. For its part, Iran resolutely denies employing such a practice.
In early July, the Pentagon said that US forces had prevented an attempted seizure by the Iranian Navy of two commercial oil tankers, the Marshall Islands-flagged TRF Moss and Richmond Voyager, following through the Strait of Hormuz. Allegedly, Iranian forces opened fire at the Richmond Voyager, but had to change course after the US Navy sent the USS McFaul destroyer and MQ-9 combat drone to the scene, as per the Pentagon’s story.
However, the Iranian Foreign Ministry dismissed the US’ reports about the Iranian Navy attempting to seize any oil tankers off the Omani shore.
The Strait of Hormuz plays a crucial role for global trade. According to some estimates, roughly 88% of all oil going from the Persian Gulf passes through the strait. Tankers carry around 17 million barrels of oil daily through the strait. In other words, it’s up to 30% of the world’s total consumption of the commodity.
The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a DC-based US think tank, voices skepticism over Washington’s plans to ensure the Strait of Hormuz’s security. According to DC scholars, it’s the US who aggravated tensions in the region in the first place. With different US policies, this situation could have been avoided, the think tank argues.
“Iran has not intercepted shipping because Iranians have some genetic malice that compels them to do such things,” the report read. “As with many other Iranian policies and actions, this practice is reactive. It was the United States, not Iran, that began the latest round of going after another nation’s tankers and seizing its oil. The US actions reflect a unilateral US policy of trying to prevent Iranian oil exports.”
Given that the US policy of seizing foreign oil vessels is not grounded in international law, it’s hardly surprising that Tehran qualified such actions as “piracy,” the report said, citing the seizure of a tanker full of Iranian oil in April by the US. This crude was then brought to Houston.
The US strategy of increasing its presence in the Gulf “perpetuates US vulnerabilities,” argued the think tank. First, thousands of US Marines and sailors could become a target of hostile fire, just like their counterparts in Iraq and Syria. Second, it may draw the US into new armed conflicts. Third, it could stir up regional rivalries.
The decision to put the US military on commercial ships may lead to a direct confrontation between the US and Iran, warned the report. If a clash occurs involving the commercial vessel of a third party, guarded by US troops, that could mean a broader international scandal.
Besides the situation described in the think tank’s report, the US may face humiliation akin to a January 12, 2016 incident, when two United States Navy riverine command boats were seized by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy.
What’s worse, the US initiative comes at a time when major regional players have taken a course on the de-escalation of tensions. The think tank referred to the fact that Iran and Saudi Arabia have recently started to mend fences with China’s assistance. Relations between Iran and other Middle East powers, such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, Qatar, and Oman, have also been either warming or expanding further, per the report.
Under these circumstances, the US looks like a bull in a china shop, unlike Beijing, which has already received praise for its peace initiatives and positive influence on the situation in the region.
US response to Russia-China naval patrol exposes glaring hypocrisy
By Timur Fomenko | RT | August 8, 2023
Last week, the US sent a group of warships and a reconnaissance plane to waters off the coast of Alaska after Chinese and Russian vessels conducted a joint naval patrol in the area.
A former US Navy captain and analyst for right-wing think tank the Heritage Foundation described the patrol as “highly provocative.” Because the US and its allies would never, ever do something like that, right?
The US is engaged in the full-blown militarisation of the peripheries of both China and Russia in a manner that implies it has an unconditional right to do so. This behaviour has not only provoked one war, in Ukraine, but risks triggering a second one, over the Taiwan Strait, too. The reality, of course, is that neither Russia nor China poses any threat to Alaska whatsoever, because the conflict, or risk thereof, is at their own front doors, not America’s.
The US is the most militaristic and aggressive country in modern history. It has established a global military presence that spans every single continent with hundreds of military bases. In doing so, it claims it supports the freedom and self-determination of others. In reality, it provocatively encircles states that it deems rivals to its own global dominance, escalates tensions, and then when these states respond to the situation, subsequently brands them as the “aggressors,” thus affirming and even expanding its military footprint in these given regions.
With Russia, the US has pursued a relentless expansion of NATO eastwards since the Cold War, absorbing former members of the Soviet Union’s alliance system even when Russia had no will to compete with it. NATO has evolved from a unit of collective self-defence in a specific geographic region into an increasingly global ideological crusade which serves the goals of the US. The words “North Atlantic” in its name are increasingly redundant as Washington even endeavours to broaden its reach to Asia and the Pacific.
Which leads to the next point, China. The US is pushing for a full-scale military and naval encirclement around China’s eastern periphery, deliberately using the Taiwan independence issue as a wedge to ramp up tensions despite the One China Policy and giving the island region more and more arms. While doing this, it is forcing more and more countries to accept a greater American military presence. This recently included the Philippines, where the US gained access to a number of bases, as well as Papua New Guinea, where a defence cooperation agreement was recently signed. At the same time, the US constantly sails warships through the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait, citing so-called “freedom of navigation” from a law which it does not even ratify. China’s retaliatory actions are then branded “aggressive” and threatening the peace of the region.
If this constitutes normal behaviour and a sovereign right of the US, why can China and Russia not sail patrols up to Alaskan waters? Why is one behaviour described as “freedom of navigation” but the other is labelled “highly provocative”? The reality is that because both countries are concerned about the US on their doorsteps, they have little interest in ever waging war as far afield in Alaska. The same cannot be said about US actions on their doorsteps, whereby the threat of war is very, very real and is being cranked up even higher by Washington. The US deems it has rights which other countries do not, which leads to the double standards voiced in the media regarding these seemingly equal actions.
China-Russia military cooperation is a product of the US antagonising them both, rather than so-called “provocative behaviour.” In the geographic sphere of Northeast Asia, the two countries have shared strategic interests which concern checking the expansion of US military power in Japan and the Korean Peninsula. This extends to the Northern Pacific. Neither country has any specific ambitions regarding Alaska. Neither China nor Russia is attempting to foster an independence or separatist movement there, unlike what the US is doing with Taiwan, and then groom it into a military partner hostile to Washington. Therein lies the difference between the two sets of military behaviour. China and Russia may cooperate for common strategic objectives, but they are not exerting aggression in the process. On the other hand, the US’ military presence and patrols are designed to upend a region and turn countries against other, provoke strife, and of course advance its economic goals. The irony is that media discourse presents this as entirely normal and justified, but then depicts Russia-China cooperation as a potential threat to Alaska.
Professor John Mearsheimer on the Ukraine War
Why didn’t the West negotiate an Austrian-style neutrality deal with Russia?
By JOHN LEAKE | COURAGEOUS DISCOURSE | AUGUST 6, 2023
The Canadian writer and journalist, Aaron Maté, just published what strikes me as the most intelligent and illuminating conversation about the war in Ukraine I’ve heard thus far.
I have studied European history for forty years and lived in Austria for a total of 15. For the last 18 months I have tried in vain to answer the question: Why didn’t the United States at least try to negotiate with Russia for an Austrian-style neutrality deal for Ukraine?
Consider that if a neutrality deal was struck and the Russians subsequently violated it, THAT would be clear grounds for war. Instead, the United States government has simply and and steadfastly dismissed Russia’s view of the matter—a view that Russia has plainly and repeatedly stated since at least 2008.
Note that the arrogant and dismissive attitude of the U.S. government towards Russia since 2008 was in spite of the fact that Cold War eminences such as George Kennan urged the United States government to abandon its harebrained NATO expansion plan in 1997. As Kennan put it in a February 5, 1997 New York Times essay titled “A Fateful Error:”
Why, with all the hopeful possibilities engendered by the end of the Cold War, should East-West relations become centered on the question of who would be allied with whom and, by implication, against whom in some fanciful, totally unforeseeable and most improbable future military conflict?
[B]luntly stated… expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking …
Several of Kennan’s fellow Cold Warriors, including Robert McNamara and Paul Nitze, agreed wholeheartedly with him, as is evidenced by their June 26, 1997 letter to President Bill Clinton.
Back to the central question of this essay: for those unfamiliar with the 1955 State Treaty and Austrian Neutrality:
The treaty forbade unification with Germany or restoration of the Habsburgs and provided safeguards for Austria’s Croat and Slovene minorities. Austrian neutrality and a ban on foreign military bases in Austria were later incorporated into the Austrian constitution by the Law of October 26, 1955. The 40,000 Soviet troops in Austria were withdrawn by late September. The small number of Western troops that remained were withdrawn by late October.
Austrian neutrality has been honored ever since and has served the Austrian people very well. The Austrian capital, Vienna, is routinely ranked as having the highest quality of life on earth. To be sure, there is a handful of incredibly stupid and venal people in Austria who claim they wish to abandon Austrian neutrality, but they merit so little attention that I almost didn’t write this sentence.
So, why didn’t the United States government negotiate with Russia for an Austrian-style neutrality for Ukraine? Professor Mearsheimer suspects that only sheer stupidity can explain it. Aaron Maté suspects cynicism.
I suspect it’s a combination of stupidity, ignorance, cynicism, greed, bloody-mindedness, narcissism, sadism, contempt, misanthropy, and recklessness—in a word, depravity. Holders of high political office who prefer to send hundreds of thousands of young men to their deaths without at least trying diplomacy are simply terrible people in every respect.
NATO Instructors Trained Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion Soldiers in 2021
Sputnik – 06.08.2023
NATO military instructors from Denmark and the United Kingdom trained Ukrainian soldiers at a base of the nationalist Azov battalion, despite Azov’s exclusion from US military funding due to its radicalism, according to documents from the Danish embassy in Kiev seen by Sputnik on Sunday.
A note from the Danish embassy dated May 21, 2021, informed the Ukrainian Defense Ministry of the arrival of six instructors for the 56-th Ukrainian army brigade in Berdyansk and Urzuf, where Azov’s main base was located.
“These sites were previously investigated by Russian law enforcement officers, and the materials found there directly point to intensive training of mobilized Ukrainian citizens by Western officers, using criminal methods of warfare, which the Azovs were fluent in,” a law enforcement officer told Sputnik.
The instructors of the UK’s OP ORBITAL training team had already been present in Ukraine before, the document showed.
“Operation ORBITAL is the code name of a UK program to train Ukrainian army servicepeople from the mobilization reserve. I note that these officers, as stated in the text of the document, have access to classified information, which indicates that Ukraine has provided access to information constituting state secrets, including mobilization planning documents,” the officer said.
Despite the fact that the Azov battalion has been recognized by the United States as a neo-Nazi organization, NATO forces were directly involved in training of nationalist armed formations, they noted.
“This is evidence of Kiev’s intensive preparations for active combat operations under NATO’s supervision,” the law enforcement officer concluded.
In August 2022, the Russian Supreme Court designated Azov as a terrorist organization. The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office said that Azov militants use prohibited means and methods of warfare and are complicit in the torture of civilians and the killing of children.
Iran responds to US military moves with more firepower
RT | August 6, 2023
Iran has beefed up the weaponry of its naval forces, arming them with such tools as additional drones and precision missiles with ranges up to 1,000 kilometers (620 miles), amid rising tensions with the US over shipping traffic through the world oil market’s most crucial bottleneck.
The Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy officially took possession of the new gear at a ceremony on Saturday, state-run media outlets reported. The systems include reconnaissance and combat drones, as well as electronic warfare equipment, truck-mounted missile launchers, and hundreds of cruise and ballistic missiles.
The announcement came after reports earlier this week that US military officials had drawn up unprecedented plans to place armed troops on commercial trips in the Strait of Hormuz. Just last month, the Pentagon announced deployments of additional fighter jets and naval assets to the Persian Gulf region in response to “alarming events,” such as Iranian seizures of commercial vessels.
Brigadier General Abolfazi Shekarchi, a spokesman for the Iranian military, denounced Washington’s proposed deployment of troops on private ships. “What do the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean have to do with America?” he told Iran’s Tasnim news agency. “What is your business here?”
About 20% of the world’s oil supplies, or one-third of all seaborne crude shipments, go through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow passage that connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Tehran typically accuses the operators of detained ships of shipping violations, such as oil smuggling. Some of the vessels have only been released after other countries free detained Iranian tankers.
The new missiles give the IRGC Navy better accuracy and longer range than it previously had available, commander Alireza Tangsiri said. “The cruise missiles can attack several targets simultaneously, and the commands can be altered after takeoff,” he added.
US-Iran tensions have risen since Washington pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. Efforts to revive the agreement, known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), have failed, despite the change in US leadership when Joe Biden succeeded Donald Trump as president in January 2021.
Featured Video
U.S. Naval Blockade & Ground Invasion of Iran?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Free Book
Tell Me Again, Who Made The Desert Bloom?
Lawrence of Cyberia | March 19, 2010
In December 1945 and January 1946, the British Mandate authorities carried out an extensive survey of Palestine, in support of the work of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. The results were published in the Survey of Palestine, which has been scanned and made available online by Palestine Remembered; all 1300 pages can be read here.
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Iran Opens Strait of Hormuz for Duration of Lebanon Ceasefire
- Russian security chief issues warning to four NATO states
- Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Naval Blockade & Ground Invasion of Iran?
- The Iran War Exposes the Emptiness of American ‘Strength’ in East Asia
- Europe’s Drone Pipeline to Ukraine Could Soon be in Russia’s Crosshairs – Analyst
- EU spied on Orban for years – former Slovak minister
- Fact-Checking the “Placebo Control” Fact Checkers
- An Open Letter To President Donald Trump (My Response) | Candace
- Arms industry given direct influence over university courses
- Another Trump Flip Flop: From ‘Kill FISA’ to ‘Clean Renewal’
- If Americans Knew
- With multiple “ceasefires” in place, Israel keeps on killing in Gaza and Lebanon – Daily Update
- Mearsheimer: Israel Owns Trump
- Mark Levin and Jonathan Pollard Push for Nuking Iran
- TCN: America Enables Israel’s Crimes
- Israel’s Next Leader Will Be Just Like Bibi – but Without the Corruption
- Born into war, raised across borders: The story of Gaza’s premature babies separated from their parents amid Israel’s genocide
- Israeli soldiers suspected of raping Palestinian detainee allowed to return to service
- Gaza flooded with sweets as fuel and medicine withheld, health official warns
- Israel, US ready for wars to resume, as Gaza healthcare is in freefall – Daily Update
- Commentary: take away Israel’s biggest weapon
- No Tricks Zone
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
Aletho News 